The title says it all. Did Shawn Michaels deserve, or indeed need, the WWE title since his return? I'm talking about the Undisputed title or the WWE spinner title that have been in operation between 2002-2011. I think that although he doesn't need the title to be relevant, it would have been nice to see him as the 'guy' again for one last time.
Did Shawn Michaels deserve a WWE title run between 2002-2011
- Thread starter Turnz05
- Start date
Little Jerry Lawler
Sigmund Freud On Ritalin And Roids
He won the title in the farce that was Survivor Series 2002 in which it was all about two guys and the other four just might as well been invisible. He didn't need another title reign. Fans got to see him hold the title for a month and that's probably all that they should have seen.
CrissSpades
Dark Match Winner
From what I understand, after winning in 2002, Shawn didn't want to win the title. He knew the territory that comes along with being World Champ or WWE Champ and that means he would be away from his family more doing more appearances. Would it have been nice to see him win more championships? Hell yes it would. I'm just grateful that DX finally won Tag Team gold. That was a great moment. He more than deserved it, its just he didn't want it.
Did Shawn Michaels deserve to win the WWE title between 2002-2011? NO F'IN QUESTION!
But as previously stated, he personally, did not want to and chose to put over talent instead which, I think is part of why fans appreciate him so much.
I feel this might be the position Dolph Ziggler is in after a couple years when he does finally win the title... he will be a big name but mostly putting over other up-and-comers with his tremendous selling skills.
But as previously stated, he personally, did not want to and chose to put over talent instead which, I think is part of why fans appreciate him so much.
I feel this might be the position Dolph Ziggler is in after a couple years when he does finally win the title... he will be a big name but mostly putting over other up-and-comers with his tremendous selling skills.
Of course he did. Im a HUGE HBK fan, so I always have found it sad that one of the consensus greatest wrestlers of all time held World Heavyweight titles only 4 times. It's pretty sad when guys like Christian have 4 Heavyweight title reigns (2 ECW and 2 World Title) and Sheamus already 3 heavyweight title reigns (1 World and 2 time WWE). HBKs number of reigns pale in comparison to the number of Cena, Flair, Hogan and HHH. But like others said, he wanted younger guys to have the spotlight. Hell, I would have even liked a IC or US title run for him at the end.
The funny thing about this is his matches continually overshadowed the title matches anyway. He will be known as a guy that while he didn't win many World titles, his matches were almost always the best on the show. I would say he is happy in that. It has been said already he didn't want the title, and he wanted the younger guys to have it. It's a shame that in reality a young guy doing a series of matches with Shawn would be better for them that having a match for the WWE title. It kind of goes to show how far the titles have actually fallen in prestige. Did Shawn deserve to have another WWE title run. Well of course he did, but it isn't what he wanted.
TheHitMark-SirJoseOle
A Fan Of Wrestling Not Backstage BS
Shawn Michaels competed in great World Titles matches after that feel good 2002 WHC reign he got at Survivor Series. I wouldn't have minded him winning it a couple of more times, but it's all good, his epic WM 23 main event against Cena for the WWE title says it all. He of course had those legendary encounters for the WHC against Benoit and HHH. And he also made a run for the WWE Title when Orton had it.
It was good to see the newer stars like Orton and Cena get elevated as a result of feuding with HBK. I don't think it would have upset the balance of anything if Shawn Michaels had at least won one more World Title, but again the fact he didn't also didn't hurt things any either.
It was good to see the newer stars like Orton and Cena get elevated as a result of feuding with HBK. I don't think it would have upset the balance of anything if Shawn Michaels had at least won one more World Title, but again the fact he didn't also didn't hurt things any either.
HatchetMan84
Pre-Show Stalwart
As other people have pointed out, Shawn certainly didn't need another real title run to solidify him, but i know for a fact they wanted to put the belt on him numerous times, and Shawn refused.
Shawn said in an interview that winning the big gold belt in 2002 was basically done from Vince because Vince told him that during his last run as champion in 1998, Shawn was miserable and didn't "enjoy" being champion. Shawn said Vince told him in 2002 to go out, be himself, and "enjoy it" that time around.
I remember hearing from one of the reputable wrestling sites that when Cena became legit injured from neck problems, Vince wanted Shawn to have the title then and carry the company again, but Shawn again turned it down because he felt that the young guys needed it more...
Shawn said in an interview that winning the big gold belt in 2002 was basically done from Vince because Vince told him that during his last run as champion in 1998, Shawn was miserable and didn't "enjoy" being champion. Shawn said Vince told him in 2002 to go out, be himself, and "enjoy it" that time around.
I remember hearing from one of the reputable wrestling sites that when Cena became legit injured from neck problems, Vince wanted Shawn to have the title then and carry the company again, but Shawn again turned it down because he felt that the young guys needed it more...
Why Always Me
WWF Champion
That's not the WWE Title.......may seem a bit peevish me saying that but they are two different titles. Plus back then the World title was treated as the top title and the WWE title seemed to be secondary, so maybe a WWE title run back then would not have had as much pressure and responsibilty as it does now.
Or maybe I am wrong, but either way if Shawn had wanted a WWE title run it would of happened.
Did he deserve it? Maybe. Did he need it? No. He's the Heart-Break Kid for crying out loud. Although I'm sure any fan would have popped if he ever won the title again. The ONLY time I think he should have won a title was in 2008(?) when he was feuding with Jericho and they had that ladder match for the WHC. It would have made the feud much more memorable in my opinion if even through everything he was put through by Jericho he would have ended up on top. And the easy scapegoat to get the title off him would have been the "doctors" saying he couldn't be a fighting champion because of his eye. That's really the only time he probably should have won a title. Sure this wasn't the WWE title but, close enough.
FlairFan2003
Mid-Card Championship Winner
HBK was certainly popular enough, so was Flair for that matter. I respect the fact that Michaels commited his come back to helping the company, trying to make up for his previous run when consensus was he was an unbearable self centerd jerk. The biggest problem with giving him another title run was that he only wrestled half the time and did fewer house shows. He would have had to do a full house show schedule and in general work a lot more often, which he was unwilling to do. Without the increase in work I would say no, he didnt deserve an extra title run, unless it was a short term token thing and not a consistent champ like HHH & Cena were during that time.
Maybe Shawn didn't need the belt to remain relevent. But, it would've been nice for HBK to have one final run[more length] to cement his career. As many have pointed out, his career prior to returning in 2002 was "miserable". It would've been great to see what direction his title reign may have went in if he had won the WWE Title/World Title. I really wanted to see a final run but in the end, he didn't get it. His career is just fine without it and he had a superb hall of fame career that most can only dream of.
RadicalCraig
Mellow, with a dash of Radical
Personally, I love Shawn, and everything hea done for the Wrestling Buisness. BUT, I do not think he deserved a title between 2002 and 2011, due to the fact that this was shooting into the new generation, and it was truly time for next generation superstars to hold the title. He had a good tag team run with the "new" DX, and he had plenty of headlining matches at Wrestlemanias, and Other PPV's.
I love and respect Shawn Michaela, but by then, it was time he let the younger talent get a chance at the gold.
I love and respect Shawn Michaela, but by then, it was time he let the younger talent get a chance at the gold.
Deserve and need are two entirely different things. Did Shawn DESERVE to win the WWE Championship again during the 2002-2010 part of his career? Absolutely. He was already a legend by that point and almost always stole the show, few have put in the work and effort that he had. He did not NEED to win a title though. Regardless of how often he stole the show, Michaels could generate significant interest in his matches without holding a title; plus he wanted to help by putting people over. There were a couple of opportunities for Michaels to have won a title during his 2002-2010 run.
The main two that stick out for me are both in 2007. Against Cena at Wrestlemania 23 and then later on against Orton that fall. A lot of people argue that they wanted Shawn to win at Wrestlemania 23, but that was an important win for Cena. Defeating both members of DX in the main events of two back to back Wrestlemanias helped solidify his status as the top guy. Shawn winning the title there might have seemed nice, but he did not NEED it. Then he came back to feud with Orton after Cena had to lose the title when he got injured. Michaels losing to Orton in this feud helped him become a permanent main eventer. As nice as it might have seemed to see Shawn hold the WWE Championship during this run, he just didn't need it. Guys like Cena and Orton who got put over big time by Shawn during this time DID need it.
He did hold his final world title during that run, a World Heavyweight Championship run. Then he held the Tag Team Championship with Triple H shortly before he retired. So at least he still won a couple of titles during the run, he could have not won ANY, so things could be worse. It comes down to the fact that he didn't need it and made a smart choice by choosing to put over guys who could benefit from defeating him and retaining the WWE Championship against him. So in conclusion, yes he absolutely deserved to hold the title again due to his legend status and what a great moment it would have been, but it never happened because it would have been unnecessary in the grand scheme of things.
The main two that stick out for me are both in 2007. Against Cena at Wrestlemania 23 and then later on against Orton that fall. A lot of people argue that they wanted Shawn to win at Wrestlemania 23, but that was an important win for Cena. Defeating both members of DX in the main events of two back to back Wrestlemanias helped solidify his status as the top guy. Shawn winning the title there might have seemed nice, but he did not NEED it. Then he came back to feud with Orton after Cena had to lose the title when he got injured. Michaels losing to Orton in this feud helped him become a permanent main eventer. As nice as it might have seemed to see Shawn hold the WWE Championship during this run, he just didn't need it. Guys like Cena and Orton who got put over big time by Shawn during this time DID need it.
He did hold his final world title during that run, a World Heavyweight Championship run. Then he held the Tag Team Championship with Triple H shortly before he retired. So at least he still won a couple of titles during the run, he could have not won ANY, so things could be worse. It comes down to the fact that he didn't need it and made a smart choice by choosing to put over guys who could benefit from defeating him and retaining the WWE Championship against him. So in conclusion, yes he absolutely deserved to hold the title again due to his legend status and what a great moment it would have been, but it never happened because it would have been unnecessary in the grand scheme of things.
